Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft to Pay $240 Million for Stake in Facebook

Nrbelex writes to mention The New York Times is reporting that Microsoft has beat out Google and Yahoo for a 1.6% stake in Facebook. The investment will cost Microsoft $240 million valuing the total site at somewhere around $15 billion. "The astronomical valuation for Facebook is primarily evidence that Microsoft executives believed they could not afford to lose out on the Facebook deal. Google appears to be building a dominant position in the race to serve advertisements online. Fearing it might lose control over the next generation of computer users, Microsoft has been attempting to match and in some cases block Google's plans, even if that effort is costly."

17 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. Well, it's better than... by Facetious · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... a stake in the face, I suppose.

    --
    Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    1. Re:Well, it's better than... by slyborg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Esp. if you're a vampire. Which is pretty likely on Facebook.

  2. Before everyone screams 'bubble'..... by wamatt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can I be the first?

  3. Re:to translate by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Funny

    ....because they're in the middle of a pissing match with Google. Are they competing for distance or accuracy?
    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  4. Re:to translate by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fearing it might lose control over the next generation of computer users, Microsoft has been attempting to match and in some cases block Google's plans, even if that effort is costly. In other words, they didn't spend $240 million for 1.6% because Facebook is worth $15 billion. They paid $240 million because they're in the middle of a pissing match with Google.

    Actually I blame it on bad Bistromathics, someone took one too many toothpicks from the bowl by the register and there's an extra mustard stain on the tablecloth.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  5. By "a stake in Facebook", do you mean by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...the wooden vampire-impaling kind of stake? Because if so, I think Microsoft's got it all backwards.

  6. Is the interface really any good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The past couple of days, I've been listening to my co-worker talk about hitting the wrong button and 'hugging' a large group of people. Not only is he freaking out that only the men have returned his 'hug', he is trying to figure out how tell these people that he did not mean it without alienating them.

    Who needs soap operas?

  7. I'd thought this had already happened by 2ms · · Score: 3, Funny

    Based on the giant upgrade to IE7 suggestion that started popping up every time you log in, I'd thought this had already happened.

    1. Re:I'd thought this had already happened by msimm · · Score: 2, Funny

      UPGRADE TO IE7



      There, now you don't have to feel left out.

      --
      Quack, quack.
  8. Re:to translate by SamP2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are they competing for distance or accuracy?
    Volume.
  9. Re:to translate by jc42 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ....because they're in the middle of a pissing match with Google.

    Are they competing for distance or accuracy?

    Hey, this is Microsoft we're talking about. When have they ever worried about accuracy in anything they did?

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  10. A modest proposal. by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a plan.

    Seeing this level of wisdom, after painstaking, conservative estimates of revenues and dividends were calculated to come up with this value of $15 billion, which would in the "quaint, old-fashioned" world of people who actually built companies to feed their families and those of their workers be requiring something like a billion of yearly revenue and something like $10 billion in assets, I came to the conclusion that we Slashdotters too can take advantage of this insanity.

    Here is what we should do: Each of us starts a corporation, with names like "IgnoramusMaximus' Megacorp Consolidated on the Internet!" (that last bit is important for the "traditional" investors) and then we "sell" to each other our "stakes" in these wonders of modern enterpreneurship for, say, conservatively, 20 million US dollars (or Euros) a share, with the price being "paid" in our equally valuable shares of the other Slashdotter's corporations. If we all say our stuff is worth beeeeeelions, who is to say otherwise! After all, we got web sites and email for these corps!!!

    Next thing you know, our shares can be traded on NASDAQ, NYNEX and who knows where else, as they are far in excess the required share price for those markets and I am sure we Slashdotters can create sufficient trade "volume" trading our super-shares via email 20 times a day.

    All that remains is for the turkeys, known as the "institutional investors" so start biting! After all they gamble on equally reasonably "valued" and brain-dead "opportunities" such as the above mentioned FaceBook. Why should they care if we have no product, no sales, no assets? That never stopped them before, did it?! And we are on the Internet!

    And so dear Slashdotters, I am hereby giving you your way to beeeeeelions of dollars (or euros) as easy as filling some paperwork and registering the name!

    So here it goes:

    • 1. Set up a useless Internet corporation
    • 2. Do a home-made "IPO" (complete with all the "buyer-beware" prospectuses as required by the FTC) and trade its shares for shares of other useless corporations, claiming per-share value in tens of millions (by mutual agreement).
    • 3. Create sufficient volume of trades with many, many Slashdot users thus fullfilling "serious" exchange listing requirements.
    • 4a. Get listed on NASDAQ
    • 4b. Claim your net worth is into billions if you need an actual money loan from a bank for anyting (and you will be right, according to the silly Wall Street definitions)
    • 4c. Wait for gamblers, otherwise known as "investors" to show up and start trading your make-believe corp (and they would not be able to tell a difference from a "real" one anyways). No danger of you getting accused of "inside trading" or "pump and dump" because you, on your corporation's website boldly state that "This company does Dick All, Bupkis and sometimes Didley Squat!" (in small print at the bottom)
    • 5. Profit!!
  11. Re:$15 billion in 3 years? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm curious if any other companies have experienced this kind of growth. Does anyone have any examples?


    Enron... WorldCom... Kozmo.com...
    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  12. Re:Yeah, but what IS Facebook? by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, there is, but that domain is just a redirect to slashdot.org.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  13. Re:Yeah, but what IS Facebook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Facebook is a text-based RPG.

  14. Re:Yeah, but what IS Facebook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I think it has more to do with the fact that you have no friends. Although I'll admit that living under a rock would certainly play a part.

  15. Re:The next Big thing, again by OneoFamillion · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fox pays $580 for myspace The Price Is Right.